To be fair, knowing the difference between Topeka and Kansas City is like knowing the difference between the various Zune devices.

It's not like they were confusing Kansas City, Missouri with Kansas City, Kansas. This isn't even a geography problem -- the two cities have completely different and unambiguous names. It's a string comparison failure.

Having just consulted a map, it appears that one is 20 miles down the road from the other. It's quite possible that both are going to be covered by the rollout - the article is a little unclear, but seems to support this.

Having just consulted a map, it appears that one is 20 miles down the road from the other. It's quite possible that both are going to be covered by the rollout - the article is a little unclear, but seems to support this.

It's more like 60. In normal traffic it takes over an hour to do the drive and there's lots of nothin in-between.

What, you bricked the router? Fat chance of connecting back to Kansas by fibre now you fool. You better hope the great oz has more than brains, hearts and courage behind that curtain.

Why, anybody can have a router. That's a very mediocre commodity. Every pusillanimous creature that surfs the net or clicks on links in their mother's basement has a router. Back where I come from, we have universities, seats of great learning, where men go to become great thinkers. And when they come out, they design networks with no more brains than you have. But they have one thing you haven't got: a CCNP.

Which is why you continue to develop wireless technology! Make it better, not run away from it!

I remember how impressed I was when a friend was working on technology to improve bandwidth over copper from the 56K baud modems everyone had in the mid 90's. Now you can get blitzed in and use the free wifi which utterly smokes 56K and everyone's taking it for granted!

To have wireless to the home, you'd need a tower at the end of every street, because the spectrum just gets too crowded when Everyone logs in. Current Wireless doesn't scale to replace landlines in a medium to high-density residential area. Plus, it's not as secure. And wireless standards keep getting upgraded, requiring new hardware. Fibre probably won't need replacing for 50-100 years.

Expensive fiber is only used for ground (loop) isolation, lightning protection, or sheer inertia for gig and slower. 10 gig has been the standard for a long time. Off the shelf you're looking at about $300 for a PCI card for a typical server. GBIC transceivers are about $150. Because thats probably well under an order of magnitude cheaper than the labor for the fiber install, it seems pointless to try to "save money" by running 10 meg ethernet over a fiber.

Odds are good you'll never see OC-192 gear next to 10-gig cards at WalMart, primarily because OC-192 is a notch SLOWER than 10-gig. Odds are also pretty good that you're not getting 10-gig fiber interfaces on servers for $450.

I was wondering where parent was getting their pricing from because I wanted in on that back of the truck action. 10gig is still very hard for me to justify when LACP on my gear can bond up to 8 gigabit connections and is usually less than half and sometimes a quarter of the price of 10gig gear. It has taken a long time to even start coming down in price.

You can't buy 10gig fiber gear at walmart. Today. Outside of Kansas. So far. That is likely to be the big problem, as there is probably a city full of bloatware installed bargain basement $250 PCs, so sticking a $300 card in a $250 PC with no firewall is going to be a bit... weird.

It seems likely that a FTTH provider would just supply a "modem" that converts from fiber to e.g. 1000Base-T ethernet.

And what does that wireless connection connect to? At some point in the connection, there will always be wires. They're faster and typically more reliable. So even if user devices all connect to the network wirelessly, the access points will almost always be connected phyically somehow.

Not even that. There is no way that I would RELY on wireless for my home office. For home use, possibly. Not likely, but possibly. I would let machines in the home or office connect wirelessly to the router that has a wired internet connection, but that is only because in a pinch, I could drag a physical cable from the router to the PC.

Because wireless cannot provide the bandwidth... should give you an idea how far away from reality thoughts that wired is expired and wireless is the way to go are

Sounds like you are saying wireless can not provide the bandwidth...which I totally agree with,

... however than you say wireless is the way to go or at least it seemed to me. I must disagree with that...which is it?.

Not that it matters as anything other than Fiber To The Home (FTTH) is a ponzi scheme, false promises, waste of time and money. Only FTTH offers us a viable future! Why should Americans continue to settle for less? Japan had 100Mb/100Mb in 2000 and 1Gb/1Gb in 2006, its 2011...hello, 768K

it will be before people start slagging off Google for this, questioning their business practices, accusing them of being stooges for the government, claiming that they will just use this to spy on everybody's browsing habits so they can make money from it etc, ad-infinitum, ad nauseum.

Google tries to making using the internet faster and easier because that generally means more people will use existing Google products that serve ads and mine data. This doesn't mean Android or GoogleISP will be pulling an NSA and DPI-ing every last bit that flows through their devices. And really if you're worried about that, who can you trust because your existing ISP or mobile phone manufacturer can pull the same stunt.

Google is planning on their network to be much faster. The rest are just guesses but I am betting that Googles will be cheaper and have no caps. Plus I am willing to bet that they will not be any throttling of say NetFlix.

... and launching part of the network in Kansas City. The city of Topeka had actually temporarily renamed itself Google, Kansas, the capital city of fiber optics, in a move to get Google to lay fiber there. It seems to have worked...

Heh. I'll translate this to more popular city names so everybody can understand the full impact of this statement:

... and launching part of the network in Los Angeles. The city of Sacramento had actually temporarily renamed itself Google, California, the capital city of fiber optics, in a move to get Google to lay fiber there. It seems to have worked...

... and launching part of the network in Kansas City. The city of Topeka had actually temporarily renamed itself Google, Kansas, the capital city of fiber optics, in a move to get Google to lay fiber there. It seems to have worked...

Heh. I'll translate this to more popular city names so everybody can understand the full impact of this statement:

... and launching part of the network in Los Angeles. The city of Sacramento had actually temporarily renamed itself Google, California, the capital city of fiber optics, in a move to get Google to lay fiber there. It seems to have worked...

To be fair, Topeka is only like 40 miles from KC, while Sac is closer to 300 miles from LA. But yeah - serious geography fail on the part of the submitter.

To be fair, Topeka is only like 40 miles from KC, while Sac is closer to 300 miles from LA.

Off topic: I did wrestle with that for a bit. The problem with '40 miles from LA' is that, in a sense, you're still in the "LA area". So if Ventura (bad example, but bear with me) were renamed to "Google", then LA got the fibre, that'd make sense. Also, that wouldn't be the capital of California. So... if you scale things up a bit, Sac makes more sense... but maybe because I live in LA I wasn't considerate enough for the rest of the readership, here.

... and launching part of the network in Washington DC. The city of Baltimore had actually temporarily renamed itself Google, MD, the capital city of fiber optics, in a move to get Google to lay fiber there. It seems to have worked...

Having lived in KC a few years back I can vouch for the need to revitalize the area. If bringing in fiber can help get improved access for schools, libraries and community centers it might just get some the many kids off the streets and away from the crime that is rampant in many of the neighborhoods. KC KS and KC MO are both sort of teetering between cleaning up their act like Chicago or NYC, or falling into hopelessness like Detroit. If improved internet access and the investment it brings can help push that in the right direction I am all for it. Glad to see Google choose an under-served area with as much potential as KC.

I think you have it a bit off. First of all I have to wonder if it is 1 GB up and down. If so this would so rock. Keeping the kids off the street and getting them on the internet? I doubt it. What this will do is get businesses to move there. If they keep the cost low imagine how great this would be. Your people want to work from home? No problem they have access to your network and VOIP at full speed over a VPN. You want to start a company? VOIP is now super cheap and you have bandwidth to spare. Got an i

Dude on GB up from your office? No need to pay for hosting! Just put up a server at your office.

Agreed, this will be hugely helpful. I don't need Class A server hosting, but I'd gladly rent a $100/mo office and split the bill between 5-10 of my friends for 1gbps unmetered up/down. $33/mo (plus internet connection) for that kind of hosting is a dream come true.

As I said just think about all you could do and then multiply it by a lot of other people that are also thinking of what they could do. Not to mention that many places could provide free wifi as well. I am hoping that Google will also get a CATV deal out of this. If the idiot content providers don't bork it imagine what they could do. Instead of standard cable boxes you could use something like the ROKU box for your cable box. DVR? Not a problem use a datacenter with a SAN. how much cheaper would that be th

I'm looking forward to the actual community impact of ultra high speed when most areas in USA don't have the same level of service. The regional impacts to Kansas City metro area governments (will they offer competing services?), wireline telcos (AT&T), cable operators (Time Warner, Comcast, SureWest), and other business sectors. The impact to education will be interesting to analyze. If Kansas City KS starts sucking up all the new start ups and attracting a lot more business the surrounding areas will

Hit the nail on the head. I live just south of KCK and the only viable ISPs in the area are Comcast, Time Warner and AT&T. (SureWest is here, but is very limited in their availability.) All of them have caps and very limited speeds. If Google comes in and starts offering unmetered gigabit access to an expanding array of locations, it's only going to benefit the entire area. I've been considering leaving the area once I graduate, mainly due to lack of good Internet speeds and availability, but this will

As someone in Topeka, it didn't work, since KCK and Topeka are about 45 miles apart, and Topeka won't be benefiting from this.

Maybe it's time to start a coop with the goal of owning the lines that I've been contemplating recently. Doing so will require figuring out what would need to be done to work with the electrical guys to reuse their poles.

Who am I kidding, I don't have the money to start up something like that.

I don't think you'd get a COOP working, but you may be able to get the municipality to do so. You can do that in Kansas, but not Missouri, it's illegal. Same with Nebraska, Texas and Arkansas. The telecoms are actively lobbying to get laws passed in other states as well.

In other words, Google prefers open access for the fiber it owns while incumbent ISP-owned fiber from the likes of Comcast and AT&T want their subscribers to pay for their TV broadcast services and capping their internet services.

Yes. A lot of cities have fiber not available to the vast majority of the citizens of the state. I live in the capital of an middle-sized state and don't have any fiber option at my home at all.- and I live 2.5 miles for a fairly sizable downtown of in a city of 2.5 million or so.

Yes. A lot of cities have fiber not available to the vast majority of the citizens of the state. I live in the capital of an middle-sized state and don't have any fiber option at my home at all.- and I live 2.5 miles for a fairly sizable downtown of in a city of 2.5 million or so.

For residential. I'd be willing to bet that you've got a hybrid fiber coax install for your cabletv, and business accounts can connect to spare fibers in the HFC network. They ran 12 pair to your neighborhood node for a reason, not just because they like 11-times redundancy (or 96 pair or whatever).

I would say fiber is available to ~1% of the US population (if that). 80% of the US population live in urban (densely populated) areas but only 50% of the US population can get broadband (defined as anything faster than a single line ISDN).

Forget Google fiber. Go with Monster Cables. I've been petitioning the Oberbürgermeister in my city to get wired with Monster Cables. You can really hear the difference. Really!

However, the Oberbürgermeister has insinuated, that I might be out of my tiny little mind. When I asked if he could change the name of the city from Heidelberg to Google, he inquired if I am getting proper psychiatric care.

KCK is ghetto, they should have put this in KCMO. KCK is an industrial suburb of KCMO. It's very run down with factories and what not although it has a new mall and speedway. KCMO is the big city, not KCK. That's where all the big companies and skyscrapers are and it's way bigger than KCK too. I have family in KC and KCK is to KCMO as Garry is to Chicago.

Are probably pooping their pants right now. All their monthly limits trying to put Netflix and Hulu out of business. Once this takes off and becomes the norm, most TV will be over IP. AESOMESMERIOJFRIHBFUHFFF

I live in Kansas City, Kansas, and I'm confused. There is something suspiciously unsaid here. KCK (as it is locally called) is a terrible place. The main streets are walled up by one vacant store after another. The local government is highly corrupt, is only concerned with making money for its participants, and people don't argue these points. The murder rate is near the top for the nation, and nobody cares. The police perjure themselves any time they want. The residential areas have numerous "unfit" sticke

I live in KC, KS also. While you have a couple of valid points, could you also wrap your head around the fact that maybe this would be a GOOD THING for KCK, and propel it past KCMO / JoCo as far as business developments?

Exactly what I was going to say. It's almost as if Google chose an economically depressed but large city on purpose, to show what effects just having ultra-fast Internet will have on economic, business and educational development in a metropolitan area, to point to and say "Look what we did here, we turned this city around completely."

And even though I wholeheartedly agree that there are lots of parts in Wyandotte County that I would fear to even drive through, there is also Village West and all the new

All the Googlers will be living in Johnson County which is next door to KCKS. Johnson County has frequently been on the list of the most affluent counties in the entire US and a few times ranked number one.

I don't think that they would cap the connections, because as far as I have understood, the reason they are doing this is to analyze how people's internet habit will change in the future when gigabit internet is available on most homes. This way they can try to develop new products that will take advantage of this new habits.

...There's a lot of red tape (permitting, bidding, etc) that has to be cut before they can even start construction which could easily take until 2012....

First of all to become one of the Google's Think Big With a Gig [blogspot.com] communities, most if not all of the red tape issues needed to be already taken care just to be considered for selection. Definitely a commitment by those lucky enough to be selected to move forward.

LMAO I would love to hear any politician tell their citizen's that the reason they did not succeed in becoming one of the first 5 Google's Think Big With a Gig [blogspot.com] Community was because the telco or cable company paid me to sabotage the process.